Share this story

Rich people get all the cool stuff first—or so we in the middle class grumble and gripe to one another. Cell phones, laptops, smartphones, and now Google Glass (if applicants managed to both present a convincing case and pony up $1,500) all end up in the hands of the wealthy first. But Google Director of Engineering Ray Kurzweil made a salient point while addressing the Global Future 2045 conference this past weekend: “Only the rich have these technologies when they don’t work.”

Kurzweil, a futurist and author of the book The Singularity is Near, did a presentation at the GF 2045 conference entitled “Immortality by 2045” in which he discussed the evolution of humans and technology and how the two will one day merge. During a Q&A at the end of the presentation, one attendant expressed concern that when people have the possibility of fixing their bodies up with memory implants and bionic limbs and then eventually transferring their consciousness to a nice new android when their current body dies, it will only be the richest people in the world who will be able to afford those luxuries. The attendant called these pursuits “a privilege of the rich and powerful.”

Kurzweil came back with a description of the earliest cell phones: massive contraptions that required people to carry around some of the components in a bag. For instance, the earliest Motorola Dynatac phone released in 1984 cost $3,995, had only 30 minutes of talk time, and stored 30 phone numbers. Nearly 20 years later, smartphones replace several single-purpose gadgets, connect us socially to countries’ worth of people, and store large amounts of apps, photos, and video—all while costing just $200 on a contract.

Kurzweil’s point was that new technology is expensive when it still pretty much sucks; we just lack the perspective to realize that when said technologies are first emerging. “When [new technologies] work, they’re almost free or very inexpensive,” Kurzweil said. For someone working for a company driven forward by the early-adopter mentality, Kurzweil’s perspective is refreshing: if something seems wildly expensive, especially in the perpetual-betapoint-release times we live in, it’s just not ready yet.

Another ready example is flat-panel HDTVs. The first few models were very heavy and susceptible to image burn-in, and there was simply nothing to watch in HD. These sets also cost tens of thousands of dollars. Now, HDTVs are better-constructed and there is plenty to watch, and they cost a few hundred dollars.

Early adopters still have the advantage of ownership and can tell non-owners, self-satisfied, that their new gadget is changing the world. But it hasn’t changed the world yet. And it won’t, and can’t, until it does get less expensive and make its way into the hands of all the other late adopters.

The conversation doesn’t apply as well to software, which has a fuzzy economic history that’s too intertwined with hardware to isolate in this sense. Gmail is free and lots of people use it, so it works (or as best as it needs to, most of the time). But Linux is free, and while it does “work” for many people, it hasn’t achieved the popularity of Windows.

But Kurzweil’s point is likely extensible to Google’s smart glasses. Right now, they’re expensive and don’t do a whole lot other than take pictures and pop up alerts. Eventually, they will cost a fraction of what they do now, and their functionality now is a fraction of what it will be. They could get to that level, popularity-wise, so long as Google puts a damper on the creepiness factor.

So, envious would-be Google Glass owners or would-be owners of any new flashy piece of kit: sit back and relax. You’re not waiting for the price to come down; you’re waiting for the product to be good—if that ever happens.

Share this story

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston